Acceptance of Mitigation Plan Was Unreasonable
The government's acceptance of an organizational conflict of interest mitigation plan was unreasonable because the plan lacked sufficient detail and the proposed approaches were fundamentally problematic. The request for proposals for Medicare audit support provided the government would not contract with an entity that "has, or has the potential for, an unresolved [OCI] unless [it] determines that the risk can be sufficiently mitigated." In its proposal, the awardee acknowledged its parent company held Medicare Part D contracts, and the contracting officer found that since the awardee might evaluate work performed by its parent, the relationship created an impaired objectivity OCI. After the CO rejected several mitigation strategies, the awardee submitted a letter from its parent that stated in the event the government issued a task order to the awardee for Medicare Part D efforts, the parent would, at its discretion, either divest the awardee, terminate its Part D contracts, or subcontract out the functions that posed an OCI. The CO accepted the response and concluded the awardee was eligible for award. The protester argued the government unreasonably found the mitigation strategy acceptable.
Plan Lacked Detail
The Comptroller General sustained the protest, finding the government did not reasonably consider or evaluate the amended plan. The record showed "a seemingly last-minute and hasty acceptance" of the awardee's single-sentence amended mitigation strategy. The amended plan lacked the necessary level of detail to assess the viability of the mitigation approach because there were no details explaining how any of the three approaches "would work or when they would, or could, be implemented." Since the proposed strategies were "inherently complex" and could involve divestiture of a large corporate entity, the lack of detail was significant. Further, implementation was entirely at the parent's discretion, so each of the three options had to be capable of effectively mitigating an identified conflict. However, it was unclear how the subcontracting option was feasible or would mitigate a conflict, and the details of the divestiture option were "entirely undefined" and there was "a concomitant lack of understanding regarding the viability of such an option." The Comptroller General recommended the government reconsider its determination the awardee was eligible for award. (Cahaba Safeguard Administrators, LLC, 25 CGEN ¶113,046)